Upsetting Convention

[Telcontar]

I have a love/hate relationship with fantasy norms. There are some I find so comforting that I never get tired of them, like the enigmatic sorcerer type. Love 'em. Unless they are hopelessly incompetent, an author can pull off this this type of character well enough for me to enjoy them.

Then, of course, there are conventions that bother me. Some of them are very tiny, and I try to never, ever follow them.

One such is the usual associations of West with Good, and East (and South) with bad. Basically, fantasy worlds often roughly parallel our own world's basic social geography. The most settled continents to the West, and more exotic lands to the east. Also, there is often a massive grassland/savannah (no doubt home to some horse-riding barbarians!) in the north east.

I prefer to upset this. However, in order to use a certain phrase in a current project (The Four Lords of the West, which just rolls off my tongue in a very pleasing way) I might have to actually make 'West' the civilized, quote-unquote Good side of the world. Or, if not Good, at least more familiar to the reader as much of the action takes place there.

Oh, well. It won't be that big of a deal in the long run, but I really do find it bothering me. Anybody else ever run into these little things? Little pet peeves that you somehow find yourself contributing to?

[TWErvin2]

Of the fantasy authors I tend to read, the geography thing doesn't fit the mold that concerns you (mainly Brust, Donaldson, Zelazny, Saberhagen, and Moorcock--I need to get some newer ones soon). In my first fantasy novel, set mainly in a post apocalyptic Europe, the Necromancer King resides in the north and his legions of zombies and such march south (against the 'good guys'). In the second novel, the threat comes from the west. But I guess I could just as easily have had it work otherwise. Just how my world fell into place.

There are so many good authors out there, just avoid the ones that have elements that annoy you. And throw any 'convention' to the wind with your novel. Shaking things up a bit never hurts--okay maybe rarely it does

[Monshala]

Perhaps because we progress to the "right", east tends to be the positive and west, "left" is the negative. North has such symbolic characteristics like the North Star, north represents "Up" versus south, etc. etc. (I do this whole, "etc. etc." thing a lot. My bad). Anyway, it may sound elementary, but I believe our brains are just wired that way from institutionalized learning. When we create our own worlds, we need to challenge ourseslves and break the mold, but do so with simplistic reason to allow our readers to believe without being re-wired.

[Devor]

It's my understanding that the problem with this convention stems not from the heroes being in the west but from the villains, by contrast, ending up in the East. It starts with the idea that the West is familiar and the East is exotic, but people over-interpret it to mean that the people living in the East are vile corruptible hordes.

So if you really want to use "The Four Lords of the West," that's the first and less controversial half of the convention. You could probably circumvent this by doing something fun in the East and having the "villains" come from North-by-North-West or South-by-South-East or something.

[Ghost]

I don't see what's wrong with The Four Lords of the East. It could be changed to The Four Eastern Lords, The Eastern Four, The Four Lords of the South, The Four Lords, whatever. I don't think the name is that important in this case. If it bothers you to see East = Evil, I don't see why you'd write it unless they turn out to be the good guys after all.

As for annoying things that somehow ended up in my own work, I'd go with elves. They were the long-lived, tree-dwelling, wise, slim and fair type, complete with a flowing language. The main difference between them and most other elves was that they were racist and tried to commit genocide against humans and "impure" elves. I realized this wasn't the type of fantasy I wanted to do. I don't really like reading about elves, why should I write about them?

[newtofantasy]

Didn't the The Wise Men come from the East?

[Elder the Dwarf]

There are four cardinal directions, so why not just make them south or north? Although in my experience north is usually used as evil more often than south. Screw it, make it the evil Center. Evil spreads out from the middle. And, newtofantasy, I think he's referring to most modern fantasy where the west is portrayed as "good" because in the history there has been a perception that the West is "cultured" or "good".

[Telcontar]

Well, '... of the East' just seems to roll a bit less easily than '... of the West.' In any case, I don't intend for this book to be so simplistic as to have any direction be the one that 'evil' comes from. More it will be as Devor pointed out - not so much a contrast between good and evil as between Familiar and Exotic.

In the end I am likely to keep it this way - I've removed most other habitual parallels to Earth's geography wherever I can do so without troubling the story. I was just remarking upon the fact that the cliche exists, and I dislike seeing it. Especially in my own writing!

[Reaver]

One of my biggest pet peeves that seems to repeat itself is the majority of main characters who are "Nordic" types...you know, the ones with "faces like sculpted ivory, beset with eyes of sapphire, framed by luminious golden tresses". Or anything similar to that except that their hair or eye color may vary. That type of limited scope really bugs me. I also dislike stories with far too many POV's..for example, (and I may be making some enemies by saying this) Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth Series..chiefly after "Blood of the Fold". I mean, how many POV's were in those books? I lost count. Anyone agree? Disagree?
But I digress...those are my main pet peeves with mainstream fantasy fiction.

[DameiThiessen]

I know what you mean...but I did it on purpose for that fact. xD Traditionally the four cardinal directions are all associated with the four elements, which are all associated with the four temperaments (or the "four functions" in personality psychology).

South - Fire - Instinctually motivated
North - Earth - Sensually motivated
West - Air - Intellectually motivated
East - Water - Emotionally motivated

I think we've all fallen into this trap because of the effect Classical literature and mythos has had on Western civilization. The west is "civilized" and "good" because it represents our reasoning mind, and the east is "exotic" and "bad" because it represents our irrational mind. People from the north are down-to-earth hard working types that revel in creature comforts, and people in the south are wild and live like animals.

Just something to think about. ;P